What Is the Evidence That Invasive Species Are a Significant Contributor to the Decline Or Loss of Threatened Species? Philip D

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

What Is the Evidence That Invasive Species Are a Significant Contributor to the Decline Or Loss of Threatened Species? Philip D Invasive Species Systematic Review, March 2015 What is the evidence that invasive species are a significant contributor to the decline or loss of threatened species? Philip D. Roberts, Hilda Diaz-Soltero, David J. Hemming, Martin J. Parr, Richard H. Shaw, Nicola Wakefield, Holly J. Wright, Arne B.R. Witt www.cabi.org KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE Contents Contents .................................................................................................................................. 1 Abstract .................................................................................................................................... 3 Keywords ................................................................................................................................. 4 Definitions ................................................................................................................................ 4 Background .............................................................................................................................. 5 Objective of the review ............................................................................................................ 7 The primary review question: ....................................................................................... 7 Secondary question 1: ................................................................................................. 7 Secondary question 2: ................................................................................................. 7 Methods ................................................................................................................................... 8 Results ................................................................................................................................... 13 Search results ............................................................................................................ 13 Scope ......................................................................................................................... 13 Results secondary questions 1 .................................................................................. 17 Results secondary question 2 .................................................................................... 19 Discussion ............................................................................................................................. 21 Discussion secondary question 1 .............................................................................. 21 Discussion secondary question 2 .............................................................................. 22 Review limitations ...................................................................................................... 23 Recommendations for further development of the map ............................................. 26 Review Conclusions ................................................................................................... 26 Implications for Research .......................................................................................... 29 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 31 Competing interests ............................................................................................................... 31 Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................. 31 References ............................................................................................................................ 32 Appendix 1: Species list of the review for secondary question 1 ........................................... 33 Appendix 2: Quality coding tool ............................................................................................. 43 Appendix 3: Data presented by invasive species .................................................................. 44 Appendix 4: Data presented by Threatened species ............................................................. 66 Appendix 5: Still visuals of the taxonomic species pair data ................................................. 88 Appendix 6: List of references included in the final review from which data was extracted from. ....................................................................................................................................... 93 1 Authors Philip D. Roberts [email protected] David J. Hemming [email protected] Martin J. Parr [email protected] Nicola Wakefield [email protected] Holly J. Wright [email protected] CABI Head Office Nosworthy Way Wallingford OX108DE United Kingdom Hilda Diaz-Soltero [email protected] USDA, National Invasive Species Council, 1201 Eye Street, NW., 5th Floor, Washington, DC, USA Richard H. Shaw [email protected] CABI, Bakeham Lane, Egham, Surrey, TW209TY, United Kingdom Arne B.R. Witt [email protected] CABI Canary Bird, 673 Limuru Road, Muthaiga, PO Box 633-00621, Nairobi, KENYA 2 Abstract Background: The Convention on Biological Diversity has reported invasive species as 2nd greatest cause of species extinction (COP10). However few efforts have been made to collate the evidence to support or contest the impact of invasive species on the decline and/or extinction of threatened species across large taxonomic or geographical scales. This Systematic Review was commissioned by the United States Department for Agriculture (USDA) Invasives Causing Extinction (ICE) programme to determine if the COP10 statement was based on scientific evidence. The evidence needs to be systematically reviewed and mapped to determine the importance and relevance of any such effects in order to develop national and international policies addressing the loss of threatened species, and to prioritise research and mitigation efforts. Methods/design: The searching of online publication databases, grey literature and other resources, such as recovery plans of endangered species, aims to gather existing evidence on whether invasive species are a significant contributor to the decline and/or extinction of threatened species. This study focuses on species under threat in the United States of America (USA). The methods used to carry out the Systematic Review will address the following two fundamental questions: (a) what proportion of threatened species have an invasive species as a significant contributor to their decline?, and (b) through what mechanisms do invasive species contribute towards the decline of native species? The pool of resources gathered has been analysed for relevance and quality using a pre-defined scoring system. A systematic map has been produced, summarising information from individual studies. Results: This systematic review found broad scientific consensus that invasive species are likely to play a crucial and devastating role in driving species extinctions. The review found that the topic has been vastly understudied. Despite the level of concern raised in the COP10 statement, when considering all US FWS ‘threatened species’, for only 6.5% have studies of the impact of invasive species been conducted and published. The reasons for this lack of evidence will be explored subsequently. What is most striking, is that, despite the limited number of studies, where evidence does exist it was overwhelmingly negative. Of all studies that investigated the impact of invasive species on US ‘threatened species’ 80% reported a negative impact. To maximise the practical use of the of this systematic review map the mechanisms of impact were recorded to help provide points of management intervention. The most common mechanisms of impact reported were predation, competition for resources and herbivory. Conclusions: There is broad scientific consensus that invasive species are likely to play a crucial and devastating role in driving species extinctions. This Systematic Review set out to collect all of the available evidence relating to this claim for US FWS ‘threatened species’. This is the first time all evidence has been collated at such a large taxonomic or geographical scale. The review found that the topic has been vastly understudied. Despite the level of concern raised in the COP10 statement, when considering all US FWS ‘threatened species’, for only 6.5% have studies of the impact of invasive species been conducted and published. The reasons for this lack of evidence will be explored subsequently. What is most striking, is that, despite the limited number of studies, where evidence does exist it was overwhelmingly negative. Of all studies that investigated the impact of invasive species on US ‘threatened species’ 80% (158 cases of evidence) reported a negative impact. This dominance of negative interactions is a clear evidence-based message to policy makers and land managers of the importance of the impact that invasive species are having on already imperilled species. 3 Keywords • Invasive species • Alien species • Threatened species • Impact, Decline • Extinction, Mechanism Definitions Invasive species: As defined by the United States of America (USA) Presidential Executive Order 13112 of February 3, 1999 is being used. It states that an “Alien species” means, with respect to a particular ecosystem, any species, including its seeds, eggs, spores, or other biological material capable of propagating that species, that is not native to that ecosystem. It also states that “Invasive species” means
Recommended publications
  • Handbook Publication.Pub
    Table of Contents Maui County’s Landscape and Gardening Handbook Xeriscaping in Maui County ................................................................. 1 Planning and Design................................................................................................................. 1 Hydro-zones.............................................................................................................................. 1 Plant Selection and the Maui jkCounty Planting Zones............................................................ 2 Soil Preparation ........................................................................................................................ 4 Mulching.................................................................................................................................... 5 Irrigation .................................................................................................................................... 5 Maintenance ............................................................................................................................. 7 Other Interesting Techniques for the Ambitious ..................................... 8 Xeriscape Ponds....................................................................................................................... 8 Aquaponics in the Backyard ..................................................................................................... 9 Water Polymer Crystals ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Studies in Annonaceae. VIII. a Cladistic Analysis of Tetrameranthus
    TAXON 37(2): 346-353. MAY 1988 Studies in Annonaceae. VIII. A cladistic analysis of Tetrameranthus J. Koek-Noorman1,M. Zandee2and L.Y.Th. Westra1 Summary The small genus Tetrameranthus (five species) stands isolated within the Annonaceae. A cladistic analysis was carried out using macromorphologicalcharacters in order to find possible apomorphies and to attempt a phylogenetic reconstruction. In the “best” cladograms there appear two subsets, one T. formed by T. duckei, T. macrocarpus, and pachycarpus, the other by T. laomae and T. umbellatus. Both are supported by a number of apomorphic character states. Any other conclusions remain speculative. Introduction the Westra Recently, a taxonomic revision of genus Tetrameranthus was published by data and collaborators (Westra, 1985). That paper essentially deals with presentation of (including two newly described species), it does not make any statements on possible the member the because relationships other thanaccepting genus as a of Annonaceae. This is Tetrameranthus combinationof isolated within has a unique characters and stands rather these characters leaves in the the family. Principal among are: 1) arranged a spiral, 2) perianth in whorls of four, and 3) flowers subtended by a verticil of four bracts; for more data the reader is referred to Westra (1985). In Various positions for Tetrameranthus have been proposed. Fries’s (1959) compre- the T hensive survey of Annonaceaeit is placed as the sole memberofa tribe etramerantheae in subfamily Annonoideae. Walker (1971), in a classification based on his palynological It studies, places the genus in the Uvaria tribe ofthe Malmea subfamily. shouldbe remarked in this context that there is a considerablediscrepancy between palynological data by Hesse and Waha (1984) and those by Walker.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service
    Thursday, February 27, 2003 Part II Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation or Nondesignation of Critical Habitat for 95 Plant Species From the Islands of Kauai and Niihau, HI; Final Rule VerDate Jan<31>2003 13:12 Feb 26, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\27FER2.SGM 27FER2 9116 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 2003 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR units designated for the 83 species. This FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul critical habitat designation requires the Henson, Field Supervisor, Pacific Fish and Wildlife Service Service to consult under section 7 of the Islands Office at the above address Act with regard to actions carried out, (telephone 808/541–3441; facsimile 50 CFR Part 17 funded, or authorized by a Federal 808/541–3470). agency. Section 4 of the Act requires us SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: RIN 1018–AG71 to consider economic and other relevant impacts when specifying any particular Background Endangered and Threatened Wildlife area as critical habitat. This rule also and Plants; Final Designation or In the Lists of Endangered and determines that designating critical Nondesignation of Critical Habitat for Threatened Plants (50 CFR 17.12), there habitat would not be prudent for seven 95 Plant Species From the Islands of are 95 plant species that, at the time of species. We solicited data and Kauai and Niihau, HI listing, were reported from the islands comments from the public on all aspects of Kauai and/or Niihau (Table 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Plan for Tyoj5llllt . I-Bland Plants
    Recovery Plan for tYOJ5llllt. i-bland Plants RECOVERY PLAN FOR MULTI-ISLAND PLANTS Published by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Portland, Oregon Approved: Date: / / As the Nation’s principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for most ofour nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering the wisest use ofour land and water resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving the environmental and cultural values ofour national parks and historical places, and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to assure that their development is in the best interests ofall our people. The Department also has a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island Territories under U.S. administration. DISCLAIMER PAGE Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed to be required to recover and/or protect listed species. Plans are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, sometimes prepared with the assistance ofrecovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Costs indicated for task implementation and/or time for achievement ofrecovery are only estimates and are subject to change. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approval ofany individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, otherthan the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. They represent the official position ofthe U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Florida Thesis Or Dissertation Formatting
    TOOLS FOR BIODIVERSITY ANALYSES USING NATURAL HISTORY COLLECTIONS AND REPOSITORIES: DATA MINING, MACHINE LEARNING AND PHYLODIVERSITY By CHANDRA EARL A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2020 1 . © 2020 Chandra Earl 2 . ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank my co-chairs and members of my supervisory committee for their mentoring and generous support, my collaborators and colleagues for their input and support and my parents and siblings for their loving encouragement and interest. 3 . TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................. 3 LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ 5 LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... 6 ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... 8 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 9 2 GENEDUMPER: A TOOL TO BUILD MEGAPHYLOGENIES FROM GENBANK DATA ...................................................................................................................... 12 Materials and Methods...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species Expenditure Report (1998)
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Federal and State Endangered and Threatened Species Expenditures Fiscal Year 1998 January 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................................... ii What is the purpose of this report? ....................................................................................................... ii What expenditures are reported?.......................................................................................................... ii What expenditures are not included?.................................................................................................... ii What are the expenditures reported for FY 1998?................................................................................ ii How does the 1998 expenditure report compare to other years? ......................................................... ii ENDANGERED SPECIES EXPENDITURES FISCAL YEAR 1998...................................................1 PURPOSE.............................................................................................................................................1 BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................................1 What does "Reasonably Identifiable Expenditures" mean? .........................................................1 What is not included in the report? ...............................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeography of a Pantropical Plant with Sea-Drifted Seeds; Canavalia Rosea (Sw.) DC., (Fabaceae) 汎熱帯海流散布植
    (千葉大学学位申請論文) Phylogeography of a pantropical plant with sea‐drifted seeds; Canavalia rosea (Sw.) DC., (Fabaceae) 汎熱帯海流散布植物ナガミハマナタマメ (マメ科)の系統地理 2010 年7月 千葉大学大学院理学研究科 地球生命圏科学専攻 生物学コース Mohammad Vatanparast Phylogeography of a pantropical plant with sea‐drifted seeds; Canavalia rosea (Sw.) DC., (Fabaceae) July 2010 MOHAMMAD VATANPARAST Graduate School of Science CHIBA UNIVERSITY TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGES ABSTRACT 1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION 3 Pantropical plants with sea-drifted seeds species (PPSS) 5 A project on the phylogeography of the PPSS 6 A case study of PPSS: Hibiscus tiliaceus L. 7 Canavalia rosea: a genuine pantropical plant with sea-drifted seeds 8 Overview of this study 10 CHAPTER 1 12 PHYLOGENETIC RELATIONSHIPS AMONG CANAVALIA ROSEA AND ITS ALLIED SPECIES 12 1-1 Introduction 12 1-2 Materials and Methods 15 Taxon sampling 15 DNA extraction, PCR, and sequencing 16 Phylogenetic analyses based on cpDNA sequence data 18 Phylogenetic analyses based on ITS sequence data 19 1-3 Results 21 Phylogenetic analyses based on cpDNA sequence data 21 Phylogenetic analyses based on ITS sequence data 22 1-4 Discussion 24 Phylogenetic relationships among C. rosea and its related species 24 The phylogeographic break in the Atlantic Ocean 25 Origin of the Hawaiian endemic species 26 Future prospects for the evolutionary studies among C. rosea and its allied species 27 Tables and figures 29 i TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) PAGES CHAPTER 2 40 GLOBAL GENETIC STRUCTURE OF CANAVALIA ROSEA; EVIDENCE FROM CHLOROPLAST DNA SEQUENCES 40 2-1 Introduction 40 2-2 Materials and Methods 44 Sampling 44 DNA extraction, PCR, and sequencing 44 Haplotype Composition and Network of C.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon City Nuisance Plant List
    Nuisance Plant List City of Oregon City 320 Warner Milne Road , P.O. Box 3040, Oregon City, OR 97045 Phone: (503) 657-0891, Fax: (503) 657-7892 Scientific Name Common Name Acer platanoides Norway Maple Acroptilon repens Russian knapweed Aegopodium podagraria and variegated varieties Goutweed Agropyron repens Quack grass Ailanthus altissima Tree-of-heaven Alliaria officinalis Garlic Mustard Alopecuris pratensis Meadow foxtail Anthoxanthum odoratum Sweet vernalgrass Arctium minus Common burdock Arrhenatherum elatius Tall oatgrass Bambusa sp. Bamboo Betula pendula lacinata Cutleaf birch Brachypodium sylvaticum False brome Bromus diandrus Ripgut Bromus hordeaceus Soft brome Bromus inermis Smooth brome-grasses Bromus japonicus Japanese brome-grass Bromus sterilis Poverty grass Bromus tectorum Cheatgrass Buddleia davidii (except cultivars and varieties) Butterfly bush Callitriche stagnalis Pond water starwort Cardaria draba Hoary cress Carduus acanthoides Plumeless thistle Carduus nutans Musk thistle Carduus pycnocephalus Italian thistle Carduus tenufolius Slender flowered thistle Centaurea biebersteinii Spotted knapweed Centaurea diffusa Diffuse knapweed Centaurea jacea Brown knapweed Centaurea pratensis Meadow knapweed Chelidonium majou Lesser Celandine Chicorum intybus Chicory Chondrilla juncea Rush skeletonweed Cirsium arvense Canada Thistle Cirsium vulgare Common Thistle Clematis ligusticifolia Western Clematis Clematis vitalba Traveler’s Joy Conium maculatum Poison-hemlock Convolvulus arvensis Field Morning-glory 1 Nuisance Plant List
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Reproductive Biology of Two Florida Pawpaws Asimina Reticulata Chapman and Asimina Tetramera Small Anne Cheney Cox Florida International University
    Florida International University FIU Digital Commons FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations University Graduate School 11-5-1998 Comparative reproductive biology of two Florida pawpaws asimina reticulata chapman and asimina tetramera small Anne Cheney Cox Florida International University DOI: 10.25148/etd.FI14061532 Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd Part of the Biology Commons Recommended Citation Cox, Anne Cheney, "Comparative reproductive biology of two Florida pawpaws asimina reticulata chapman and asimina tetramera small" (1998). FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 2656. https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd/2656 This work is brought to you for free and open access by the University Graduate School at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY Miami, Florida COMPARATIVE REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY OF TWO FLORIDA PAWPAWS ASIMINA RETICULATA CHAPMAN AND ASIMINA TETRAMERA SMALL A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in BIOLOGY by Anne Cheney Cox To: A rthur W. H arriott College of Arts and Sciences This dissertation, written by Anne Cheney Cox, and entitled Comparative Reproductive Biology of Two Florida Pawpaws, Asimina reticulata Chapman and Asimina tetramera Small, having been approved in respect to style and intellectual content, is referred to you for judgement. We have read this dissertation and recommend that it be approved. Jorsre E. Pena Steven F. Oberbauer Bradley C. Bennett Daniel F. Austin Suzanne Koptur, Major Professor Date of Defense: November 5, 1998 The dissertation of Anne Cheney Cox is approved.
    [Show full text]
  • United States of America
    anran Forestry Department Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations GLOBAL FOREST RESOURCES ASSESSMENT COUNTRY REPORTS NITED TATES OF MERICA U S A FRA2005/040 Rome, 2005 FRA 2005 – Country Report 040 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Forest Resources Assessment Programme Sustainably managed forests have multiple environmental and socio-economic functions important at the global, national and local scales, and play a vital part in sustainable development. Reliable and up- to-date information on the state of forest resources - not only on area and area change, but also on such variables as growing stock, wood and non-wood products, carbon, protected areas, use of forests for recreation and other services, biological diversity and forests’ contribution to national economies - is crucial to support decision-making for policies and programmes in forestry and sustainable development at all levels. FAO, at the request of its member countries, regularly monitors the world’s forests and their management and uses through the Forest Resources Assessment Programme. This country report forms part of the Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005 (FRA 2005), which is the most comprehensive assessment to date. More than 800 people have been involved, including 172 national correspondents and their colleagues, an Advisory Group, international experts, FAO staff, consultants and volunteers. Information has been collated from 229 countries and territories for three points in time: 1990, 2000 and 2005. The reporting framework for FRA 2005 is based on the thematic elements of sustainable forest management acknowledged in intergovernmental forest-related fora and includes more than 40 variables related to the extent, condition, uses and values of forest resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Sato Hawii 0085O 10652.Pdf
    RESTORATION OF HAWAIIAN TROPICAL DRY FORESTS: A BIOCULTURAL APPROACH A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI‘I AT MĀNOA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN BOTANY (CONSERVATION BIOLOGY) MAY 2020 By Aimee Y. Sato Thesis Committee: Tamara Ticktin, Chairperson Christian P. Giardina Rakan A. Zahawi Kewords: Tropical Dry Forest, Biocultural, Conservation, Restoration, Natural Regeneration, Social-Ecological 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I thank my graduate committee for steering and guiding me through my thesis work. Dr. Tamara Ticktin, my thesis advisor who has been the greatest kumu (teacher) that I could have asked for in my research. I also thank my two committee members, Dr. Rakan A. Zahawi and Dr. Christian P. Giardina, who both brought their expansive levels of expertise to help develop this thesis. Thank you so much to the hoaʻāina (caretakers/restoration managers) of my two project sites. I thank the hoaʻāina of Kaʻūpūlehu, ‘Aunty’ Yvonne Carter, ‘Uncle’ Keoki Carter, Wilds Brawner, Kekaulike Tomich, Lehua Alapai, Kuʻulei Keakealani, and ‘Aunty’ Hannah Kihalani Springer. Thank you to the hoaʻāina of Auwahi, Art Medeiros, Erica von-Allmen, Ainoa and Kalaʻau Kaiaokamalie, Amy Campbell, Andy Bieber, Robert Pitts, and Kailie Aina. I would also like to acknowledge Kamehameha Schools and the Ulupalakua Ranch for allowing me to conduct this research on their lands. Thank you to the dry forest restoration managers and researchers that participated in the overview survey of Hawaiian dry forests. On Oʻahu Island: Lorena ‘Tap’ Wada, James Harmon and Kapua Kawelo. On Hawaiʻi Island: Elliott Parsons, Rebecca Most, Lena Schnell, Kalā Asing, Jen Lawson, and Susan Cordell.
    [Show full text]